Impending new EU law

33 replies [Last post]
MisteR Tee
MisteR Tee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-08-30

rolymo35 wrote:

 

Thank you for your support MisteR-Tee , now for the rest of the story!!!

Yes, I could change the wheels to originals, wire wheels (that means set of hubs) and spinners, do you have any idea what that will cost?

Yes, I could change the rear axle (MGB late model 3’07 ratio, LSD) back to early MGA

Yes I could change the late model slotted MGB front disc brakes back to drums

Yes, I could go on and on down this route believe me, there is plenty more to list. BBBBBBut:-

WHAT DO I DO WITH THIS:-

 

 

Hope & pray that none of this ever becomes law!!!  You think you've got problems, you haven't seen mine yet!  I won't post pics or spec here but there are plenty out there on the net, just google my name.

MisteR Tee

You're never too old to go straight (for a 1/4 mile!).

MisteR Tee
MisteR Tee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-08-30

Gerard Clarke wrote:

I am surprised by the alarmist reporting of this story by C and SC.    I suggest that rumours of the impending death of the classic car are exaggerated.

Here is a counter view. These are my opinions. and I may be wrong, but I add that I am a practising barrister with over two decades experience, including extensive experience in EU law.

The draft Regulation is mainly about an EU minimum standard for roadworthiness testing. 

It is not mainly about modifications, or classic cars. 

The draft regulation will not prevent all modifications. 

It will regulate modifications which affect safety or environmental characteristics. 

It will allow for testing of modifications. 

It will allow for testing by reference to national legislation.

It will create a new and limited category of historic vehicles, which will not require testing. This will not effect UK road tax rules. Those are a matter for the UK. 

Many or even most classic cars will need testing, but will be tested by the standards applicable when they were new. (Note that "historic" and "classic" are not legal terms at present, save that historic has a limited meaning in the UK for road tax purposes, and MOT exemption). 

There remains uncertainty because parts of the draft Regulation and Annexes are ambiguous, and some local rules will be in place in any event.

There is reportedly no budget to implement this.   UK Government policy is to oppose major Euro-driven changes.  

There may be hassle for trailer and caravan users.

The draft Regulation is in many ways poorly drafted, but it is not Armageddon.

Thanks for your take on this, I did not intend this to be an alarmist topic, but merely to inform of the potential harm it could do our hobby (& in some case livelyhoods).  After all, if no one got hear about it, it could get through largely unaltered through the bungling of the EU & then would be almost impossible to alter or amend.  Perhaps you could speak to ACE & offer your view on the matter?

MisteR Tee

You're never too old to go straight (for a 1/4 mile!).

rolymo35
rolymo35's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-06-02

So OK, my car loses its historic rating and moves up to the next rated higher authority, what ever that may be: - MOT, SVA or BIVA or a new one (they) invent to suit the EU rulers. What happens to my none approved Steering wheel, an original MGA sprung wheel cost in excess of 200-us dollars in the year 2004 and may no longer be available

And finally, there is an EU regulation which calls for a combination steering lock / ignition switch to be retrospectively fitted. Think we might get that law introduced on the QT in view of the very high number German cars being nicked at the moment. Anyone know where one gets such a switch? Approved for an MGA

I suspect a little knowledge can be dangerous in these circumstances

RolyMo

rolymo35
rolymo35's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-06-02

For everyone’s entertainment I would like to relate an event of personal experience relating to how the EU policy of: - “One rule fits all” can bite you in the ass!! This just affects tyres. My family operates Dragsters and recently imported one into Germany in a container with no problem at all, but the latest one came in a container together with a spare set of rear drag slicks , after the new tyre reg’s are introduced in the EU which state ( all ,repeat all ) tyres entering the EU must conform to EU tyre manufacturers specification and codes which must be marked on the tyre accordingly ,plus must be accompanied by makers documents stating such things as (speed rating etc) .

When the shipping agent handled the unloading he should have displayed big hand held sign: - Caution you are entering a danger zone “the EU “

The dragster was no problem, it does not matter what tyres it is wearing, shipping log shows cars not tyres but the slicks cannot go through unless you have the relevant manufacturer’s documents to prove they comply with EU regulations. Hell, what do we do now?

Simple, we can direct them back to the USA (at your cost obviously)

Or we can send them on to a none EU zone country close by where you will have a better chance to arrange entry into the zone ( at your cost obviously) , Please stop banging your head on my wall !!

PS I understand the ass’n of tyre importers have resolved this for the time being, we shall see!!

RolyMo

MisteR Tee
MisteR Tee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-08-30

rolymo35 wrote:

 

For everyone’s entertainment I would like to relate an event of personal experience relating to how the EU policy of: - “One rule fits all” can bite you in the ass!! This just affects tyres. My family operates Dragsters and recently imported one into Germany in a container with no problem at all, but the latest one came in a container together with a spare set of rear drag slicks , after the new tyre reg’s are introduced in the EU which state ( all ,repeat all ) tyres entering the EU must conform to EU tyre manufacturers specification and codes which must be marked on the tyre accordingly ,plus must be accompanied by makers documents stating such things as (speed rating etc) .

When the shipping agent handled the unloading he should have displayed big hand held sign: - Caution you are entering a danger zone “the EU “

The dragster was no problem, it does not matter what tyres it is wearing, shipping log shows cars not tyres but the slicks cannot go through unless you have the relevant manufacturer’s documents to prove they comply with EU regulations. Hell, what do we do now?

Simple, we can direct them back to the USA (at your cost obviously)

Or we can send them on to a none EU zone country close by where you will have a better chance to arrange entry into the zone ( at your cost obviously) , Please stop banging your head on my wall !!

PS I understand the ass’n of tyre importers have resolved this for the time being, we shall see!!

 

That's interesting, I've been into drag racing since it's inception here in the UK, having helped set up SPR & now active again after a long break.  I now crew for a friend who first built his Competition Altered over 30 years ago & then sold it to an Englishman living in Germany (Tony Morris) who raced it for a few years then also sold it on.  We discovered it with the help of Tony's sister, languishing in an Austrian disco, re-patriated it to the UK & rebuilt it to current specs & have now raced it for the past two seasons. Tony now lives in the US working for a fuel management company (BLP) & hand-built the carb we use, on the weekends he races a pro comp dragster.  We'll be at the Flame & Thunder event at SPR in October, having been invited back to do flame burnouts!!

MisteR Tee

You're never too old to go straight (for a 1/4 mile!).

Gerard Clarke
Offline
Joined: 2012-08-31

I wasn't accusing you of being alarmist, MisteR Tee, but I am surprised to see that the C and SC report on this subject is, in my view, alarmist, and plain wrong in some respects.  As for ACE, they appear to be intent on believing the worst, come what may.  I query whether anyone there has sat down and carefully read the draft regulation, and applied to it the well established principles of interpretation which would govern an EU legislative instrument, or taken any legal advice about it.   I am happy to offer pro bono legal advice, but I do not think that groups representing what might be seen as sectional interests will easily obtain the ear of the decision makers.    This proposal affects all cars across the EU.  It is only incidentally about classic cars, and could even, if enacted, in some respects make life easier, not harder, for some classic car owners. 

It is worth stressing that we are looking at a (poor) draft, that might be amended or re-written if it does proceed.  We are not talking about something set in stone.   Debate about which mod might or might not be problematic under some new regime is to some extent academic, because we are some way off a final version of any new set of rules. 

There is no appetite in the DfT for the introduction of major change (I have had this directly from a DfT contact), and there is no money to pay for major change.    HMG policy across Whitehall under the present administration is to resist Eurochanges and be argumentative with Brussels.   Again, I have this from Whitehall sources, across several departments.

MisteR Tee
MisteR Tee's picture
Offline
Joined: 2012-08-30

Gerard Clarke wrote:

I wasn't accusing you of being alarmist, MisteR Tee, but I am surprised to see that the C and SC report on this subject is, in my view, alarmist, and plain wrong in some respects.  As for ACE, they appear to be intent on believing the worst, come what may.  I query whether anyone there has sat down and carefully read the draft regulation, and applied to it the well established principles of interpretation which would govern an EU legislative instrument, or taken any legal advice about it.   I am happy to offer pro bono legal advice, but I do not think that groups representing what might be seen as sectional interests will easily obtain the ear of the decision makers.    This proposal affects all cars across the EU.  It is only incidentally about classic cars, and could even, if enacted, in some respects make life easier, not harder, for some classic car owners. 

It is worth stressing that we are looking at a (poor) draft, that might be amended or re-written if it does proceed.  We are not talking about something set in stone.   Debate about which mod might or might not be problematic under some new regime is to some extent academic, because we are some way off a final version of any new set of rules. 

There is no appetite in the DfT for the introduction of major change (I have had this directly from a DfT contact), and there is no money to pay for major change.    HMG policy across Whitehall under the present administration is to resist Eurochanges and be argumentative with Brussels.   Again, I have this from Whitehall sources, across several departments.

 

Thanks & good to hear some good news for a change, watch this space, as they say!!!

MisteR Tee

You're never too old to go straight (for a 1/4 mile!).

rolymo35
rolymo35's picture
Offline
Joined: 2011-06-02

If the UK does not get EU reg’s I would immediately claim that was because of the ruckuses, letter writing and MEP / MP, E mail activity created by “ the Prophet of Doom club” so we won , right !

At the risk of boring a lot of motor modifiers I would like to share an event that occurred in the EU with regard to the motor industry and see how new reg’s can really hurt everyone by way of collateral damage. You will probably have zero knowledge of this event because the EU parliament does not admit to mistakes or publicises its failures.

This relates to vehicle scrappage and environmental pollution ie: - Scrap yards. In conjunction with the very active “Green-party” who constantly maintain lobby pressure on EU bosses to contain various arena’s of special interest it was decided to revamp the reg’s covering the “end of life certification” on motor vehicles by adding another clause to existing reg’s.

Simplified Version :- As of date xxxxx all vehicles prior to crushing will have all fluids, oil, trans fluids, pas & air-con anti-freeze fluid removed .Even shock- absorber fluid ( a very labour intensive operation) all these fluids must be stored in separate containers and disposed of via authorised hazardous material agents .

Also: - “All plastic material must by removed”, (Another very labour intensive operation)

So far not too much of a problem! Wrong!! All that stripping out requires a considerable increase in man-power; some of it semi-skilled which inflates the operating costs of the business. The hazardous fluids disposal is expensive (the agents CEO’s all drive top of the line Mercedes) because the Gov’t mandates that the disposal companies are the only way to go.

So when the scrappies truck arrives at the crusher expecting to collect money for the weight-in he discovers that they have been forced to impose an end of life disposal fee of approx Euro 200/250 to cover operating costs. This now has knock- back effects to private owners, dealers and insurance companies even car-sales (comes off your trade value ) the fee was required to be paid by cash in a lot of instances but that was not the biggest obstacle.

The EU has a habit of not thinking its legislation through correctly and causing major dramas likes so:-

Back at the crusher the workers were very busy ripping out all the plastic and piling it up and piling and piling until the whole available space was full, at this point they could not rent available storage space because sensible land owners did not want to get lumbered with tons of plastic that had no market

This situation forced the crushers to shut down until the problems could be resolved, next the scrap transporters shut down, end of life centres went on short time and could not take in any cars, car sales used up all available space storing old trade-ins until eventually the main dealers were affected. Now you can imagine what was happening in the board rooms of the major manufacturers when the car sales suddenly came to an abrupted halt. It seems you cannot sell new cars when disposal of oldies stops.

Requests for help at top levels fell on deaf ears at the EU and the devastating situation continued until some desperate individuals started fly tipping on a gigantic scale, some loads of plastic turned up in the most weird places like the middle of the North- Sea fishing grounds where it finally ended up washed up on Dutch beaches, this resulted in the massive intervention by various EPA’s to get the EU to back down.

WHAT IS MY POINT? Just illustrating how much power it takes to move the Union of Europe!!

RolyMo

Gerard Clarke
Offline
Joined: 2012-08-31

This from the EU:-

 

Reports in the press that the European Commission has proposed to make modifications to cars illegal, or to ban classic cars unless they are unchanged since manufacture are entirely wrong.

 

The Commission’s proposals would not, if agreed by the Member States and the European Parliament, make any difference to the current situation regarding MOT testing in the UK except to make most classic cars more than 30 years old exempt from testing if they are not used day-to-day on the roads.

 

All other cars would remain subject to roadworthiness testing, just as they are now. Whether or not they have been modified is not of itself relevant: what counts is whether they are safe and that is what is assessed by MOT tests in the UK and by the equivalent tests elsewhere.

 

What the proposals will do is require all Member States to bring their road worthiness tests up to a certain level of rigour, already applied in the UK : for example, motorbikes will need to be tested regularly everywhere, as they are already in the UK. This will make driving safer for UK drivers at home and abroad.

 

The Commission is writing separately to all the newspapers concerned, none of which checked the facts with us before publication.

 

http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/press-reports-on-ec-proposals-on-mot...

This from the EU:- Reports in the press that the European Commission has proposed to make modifications to cars illegal, or to ban classic cars unless they are unchanged since manufacture are entirely wrong. The Commission’s proposals would not, if agreed by the Member States and the European Parliament, make any difference to the current situation regarding MOT testing in the UK except to make most classic cars more than 30 years old exempt from testing if they are not used day-to-day on the roads. All other cars would remain subject to roadworthiness testing, just as they are now. Whether or not they have been modified is not of itself relevant: what counts is whether they are safe and that is what is assessed by MOT tests in the UK and by the equivalent tests elsewhere. What the proposals will do is require all Member States to bring their road worthiness tests up to a certain level of rigour, already applied in the UK : for example, motorbikes will need to be tested regularly everywhere, as they are already in the UK. This will make driving safer for UK drivers at home and abroad. The Commission is writing separately to all the newspapers concerned, none of which checked the facts with us before publication. http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/ECintheUK/press-reports-on-ec-proposals-on-mot-tests-are-in

 

Gerard Clarke
Offline
Joined: 2012-08-31

PS:  Apols for the partial duplication of that post.  My attempts to edit out the duplication appear unavailing.